Messages - scourge

More specifically, HPD is classified as a Cluster B (dramatic, emotional, or erratic) personality disorder. The personality disorders which comprise Cluster B include histrionic, antisocial, borderline, and narcissistic.

Quote

HPD has a unique position among the personality disorders in that it is the only personality disorder explicitly connected to a patient's physical appearance. Researchers have found that HPD appears primarily in men and women with above-average physical appearances. Some research has suggested that the connection between HPD and physical appearance holds for women rather than for men. Both women and men with HPD express a strong need to be the center of attention. Individuals with HPD exaggerate, throw temper tantrums, and cry if they are not the center of attention. Patients with HPD are naive, gullible, have a low frustration threshold, and strong dependency needs.

Cognitive style can be defined as a way in which an individual works with and solves cognitive tasks such as reasoning, learning, thinking, understanding, making decisions, and using memory. The cognitive style of individuals with HPD is superficial and lacks detail. In their inter-personal relationships, individuals with HPD use dramatization with a goal of impressing others. The enduring pattern of their insincere and stormy relationships leads to impairment in social and occupational areas.

Principle: God exists and is both the source of reality and its manifestation.

We'll have a winner if this could be restated in monist terms. Reality is God. Reality is a composite Great God. Its components, or facets, are the deities Life (Gaia), Time (Chronos), Death (Thanatos), Conflict (The Red God), The Fates.

The task before you is to make a society based around a singular principle, which leads to a goal, values system and culture in common. Our society as it stands now is composed of the exact opposite principle: no goal, but we facilitate any idea except that which opposes our society's design. These two are opposite extremes and as time goes on, we see how our current civilization's design brings out viciously enduring problems, like a cancer.

The singular principle is a term long forgotten by popular environmentalism and that is conservation. Conservation is both sustainability and survival over time in the relatively finite spaces we are stuck with: an ecosystem, a nation, our resources, or our planet. Sustainability is stability at all levels including minimizing social upheaval, the total recycling of non-renewables like metals, or curbing status mobility to keep collectives predictable for internal power balance. Survival means that because our space is finite, any acceleration of surplus living growth within our space will need to be accompanied by a greater trimming of this growth by various means such as attrition through wars or by temporarily raising standards for who is permitted to raise offspring in a given generation.

We presently have the luxury of being able to set aside this conservation idea and for public anger management, we rationalize our keeping this historically brief luxury, modernity, with our fantasy concepts freedom and progress. Resources are yet reasonably plentiful for the West, even if distribution remains, quite naturally, inequitable globally. If we don't wish to consume our plentiful local reserves, we are yet wealthy enough to send invading forces, or the threat thereof abroad in order to install a more favorable trading partner regime therein and use their resources instead of our own. But, how many more creative economic bubbles can we summon in order to bankroll these high stakes international games? When will internal exhaustion finally steal away Western-Atlanticist political and economic will to uncontested world power? Our militaries, finances, political and even moral credibility, are by many accounts showing signs of strain right now.

Modern progress itself has been less of a complete gain, which is the illusion, and more of a trade, which is the reality concealed by this illusion. What if the lights go out and the fuel stops getting delivered for months or years? Will almost everyone survive or will there be some dieoff and chaos? We've lost rustic survival and organizational skills but gained little indeed with our resource dependencies to power our many technological comforts. Has there been social progress as advertised? The minority races and fairer sex are still complaining as ever, even as a bit more of a share is periodically given over to them for free from the majority and male. Ah, but now another cross section of society rises up with a grievance. With the recent emergence of a Globalist Superclass, class income disparity is right at or still near its all time historic high. The poor are penniless as ever but our wealthy today make the kings of old appear as paupers.

While progress is what's advertised, the actual product is the permanent revolution activity carried over from the Lenin and Trotsky era, where a million hydra heads and a new one each day of unequal injustices that, as we are told, need to be corrected, keep our civilization in its state of ceaseless, if pointless internal conflict. In retrospect, after these several generations of having this permanent revolution, this facet of progress, spending away our internal fortitude, who has benefitted after all? It is all trading for nothing but no lasting gain as promised and that is because inequality is permanent, if perfectly natural, and thus it is something we must re-adapt to in order for us to gain as a civilization once again.

I'd think life would be like D&D: the more experience you get, the more hit points you can inflict.

The other half of that analogy is the challenges become much more difficult, foes deadlier, odds of survival less likely, treasures greater but more often in a well administered game all an illusion with experience and survival the only real reward remaining.

There's no great virtue in fully automatic fire except at essentially point blank range against massed targets.

100% agreed. It's gangsta/Hollywood bullshit that attracts idiots. Full auto isn't very useful even in present military scenarios except for laying down suppression fire against a static target in order to advance your group for better positioning. Agreed also with the shotgun for home defense. A snub nose revolver is plenty sufficient as well.

Obviously most of it was army stuff way in the past and some of it from further back growing up as a kid. Any kind of artistic, martial, academic, and trades skill is worthwhile if only to round out your knowledge as a person in society.

TEB: Many eugenicists feel it's best to be noncommittal on the race question, since it's not our major concern. What do you think?

CATTELL: I agree that the only reasonable thing is to be noncommittal on the race question — that's not the central issue, and it would be a great mistake to be sidetracked into all the emotional upsets that go on in discussions of racial differences. We should be quite careful to dissociate eugenics from it — eugenics' real concern should be with individual differences.

For anyone interested in topics like this, the article is worth a read. Although the extremist left will deny it due to their dependency on guilt-by-association fallacies, there is a substantive difference between the American/European New Right and the angry neo-Nazi stuff.

The former ranks the utilitarian as secondary, instead placing reality/truth/science first; information, potential and momentum that is immutable to the presence or absence of our social construct forms of morality which are the foundational ethics of the utilitarian (i.e. conquering nature). Yet, this harder road (e.g. eugenics) also essentially achieves utilitarian results, but as beneficial side effects rather than as fundamental purpose.

The latter seem more interested, at their very best, in struggling with the symptoms of having diversity and the suppression of political incorrectness. At the worst, it is the criminality of riffraff aimed at the defenseless, which is just pathetic and not at all a display of vigor.

This stuff is pure gold. You're either an uncommon "expert" in some compartmentalized niche, or one of the overwhelming masses of helpless drones. The universally competent type doesn't openly have a place in the Great Society.

Quote

Christopher Lasch, a left-wing populist who sounded at times suspiciously like a social conservative, defined the New Class ideology in terms of the ethos of “professionalism.” The Jeffersonian ideal of the independent yeoman farmer or tradesman--a well-rounded citizen capable of competently handling all issues that affected his daily life--was, in the view of the Progressives, obsolete. Instead, every aspect of life was to be “professionalized,” handed over to a class of “experts” protected from interference by the lower orders [Revolt of the Elites; The Culture of Narcissism; The True and Only Heaven]. This was unabashedly argued in The Promise of American Life by Herbert Croly, who sought to obtain “Jeffersonian ends with Hamiltonian means.” In this progressive manifesto, he praised “experts” and “intellectuals” in almost messianic terms.

Quote

The citizen became a client whose obligation was to trust the professional. Legitimate authority now resided in special places like the courtroom, the classroom, and the hospital; and it resided in special words shared only by experts.

Quote

John McKnight, in a speech to the 1976 retreat of the Brainerd, Minn. Community Planning Organization ["Are the Helping Systems Doing More Harm Than Good?” in Boyte pp. 173-174], described the ways the “helping professions” infantilize ordinary citizens.

Leftists, because they operate in a passive state of mind, want to make rules and have government enforce them.

There are some New Right people who call this mode of rulership soft totalitarianism. It doesn't work over the long haul for a few reasons. First, it is a micromanagement method. Second, because equal treatment is a leftist goal, the rules are made to be accessible to everyone, no matter how dumb, so the rules are oversimplified, cumbersome to distribute and enforce, and tend to fall short of making an effective impact (i.e. green consumerism). Third, you only need to bother following the rules when someone is looking over your shoulder, not because you care.

This discourages our own individual ownership of shared problems and taking personal responsibility for them. If we had a sense of reverence toward own lands and the people thereupon as a distinct cultural system it supports, the excess management structure could be trimmed back.

But then, we would have to part company with those many among us now who due to stupidity, criminal corruption, or laziness, just don't "get it". Sound unfair? If you're a leftist, yeah, definitely. If you're a realist, no, it's fair.

We were fortunate enough to have had several local small record and tape stores that often doubled as head shops (pot smoker paraphenalia) that stocked classic metal albums. This was when AC/DC, Black Sabbath, and Judas Priest were the heaviest available, just prior to Iron Maiden's popularity on our shores.

Conservationist: what about proto-glam and party boy acts Twisted Sister, Quiet Riot, and WASP?